I agree with this writer that it would be cool to incorporate 3rd down efficiency into QB ratings. I think that down has special meaning to Steeler fans, who after years of watching "Empty Backfield Ariens" and "Cushion Lebeau" call plays have become conditioned to completely stop all breathing whenever watching a 3rd down in football AT ANY LEVEL.

But I'm not sure I agree that the writer has been successful in actually coming up with a metric as useful as it could be. As below, he basically says a QB gets a better rating by getting more yards on a 3rd down pass, and a lower rating by getting fewer yards on a 3rd down pass. Somehow I get the feeling that doesn't quite capture it. I might keep it simple - how many 1st downs does the QB get with a pass on 3rd down.

If you guys were going to come up with a new kind of QB rating that incorporated 3rd down efficiency, how would you go about it?

BTW - Ben is in the lower half of the league by this metric. :shock:

Hey, don't shoot me, I'm just the ..... :lol: :lol:

http://picture-book.com/files/userimages/715u/frogsinger.jpg

************************************************** ****

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009 ... er-rating/ (http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/adding-third-down-proficiency-to-a-passer-rating/)
The Fifth Down - The New York Times N.F.L. Blog
November 25, 2009, 6:00 am
Adding Third-Down Proficiency to a Passer Rating
By LUIS DELOUREIRO

Luis DeLoureiro is building a better passer rating, among other statistical pursuits, at NFLStatAnalysis.net:

The great quarterbacks seem to make their living on third down.

With the N.F.L. stretch run approaching, I think it’s appropriate to start considering some tweaks and improvements for version 2.0 of my passer ratings – hopefully launching sometime in 2010.
Aaron Rodgers and the Packers typically find themselves in a lot of third-and-longs. (Carlos Osorio/Associated Press)

My goal is to find a way to incorporate situational statistics – more specifically, third-down success – into the ratings. However, a factor that will accurately tease out third-down success could prove challenging. Football is a moving parts game, and a quarterback’s job on third down (or any down) differs depending on the game situation.

Below, I explain the challenge and introduce a metric that I will probably incorporate into version 2.0.

The Challenge

Aaron Rodgers has proved a perfect guinea pig for my endeavor.

• He has a traditional quarterback rating of 102.6, fourth in the N.F.L. But he ranks 12th in my ratings because of his habit of taking sacks, a metric that is included in my ratings, but not the traditional one.
• On first and second down, Rodgers has a Yards Per Attempt (Y/A) — after adjusting for sacks — of 6.0. On third down his Y/A jumps to 8.1. That third-down figure ranks second only to Eli Manning’s.

What gives? Why does Aaron Rodgers have such disparate numbers when looking at different downs?

This got me back to thinking about Rodgers’s sack totals. Is Rodgers so efficient on third down because he’s a clutch player? Or, is it more simply that, because of his sack totals, he finds himself in a disproportionate number of third-and-longs?

Well, I think I have the answer.

On an average third down, the Packers need 8.4 yards to get a first down. Only the Chiefs are worse at 8.6. The Colts and Patriots (both 5.6) are the two best teams in this metric.

Rodgers, Brady, Peyton Manning, and all other quarterbacks, have the same goal on third down – to get enough yards for a first down. Rodgers has put himself in situations where, on average, he needs almost three more yards than Manning or Brady.

Therefore, Y/A can be very misleading in this situation.

The Metric

This led me to a new index to measure third-down success among quarterbacks. It’s pretty simple.

The calculation for the index is third-down passing yards divided by yards needed for a first down.

So, if Tom Brady faces a 3rd-and-5 and he completes a 10-yard pass, his index for that play is 2 (10/5). If Rodgers completes a 10-yard pass on 3rd-and-10, his index is 1 (10/10).

• Among the top 10, only Palmer (Cincinnati) and Schaub (Houston) are not in the top 10 in points scored.
• Six of the eight division leaders are in the top 10 in this metric.
• No team with a losing record is in the top 10. Houston and Atlanta are both 5-5.

In the coming weeks, I hope to include this index – along with the variables already included in my ratings – in a model to see if a superior rating can be generated.

This Week’s Rankings

• Drew Brees held onto his top spot for the third week in a row. Peyton Manning reclaimed second place (barely) from Rivers.
• Romo and Orton continued to fall. After Week 7, these two ranked 3rd and 9th. They now sit in 8th (Romo) and 13th (Orton).
• Jay Cutler and Jake Delhomme each dropped 4 spots.
• Brett Favre has moved from 15th to 6th since Week 7.
• Matthew Stafford and Brady Quinn still sit in the nether regions of the rankings. However, they were 4th and 5th in the single week ranking after their impersonations of Marino-O’Brien circa 1986.

No prob, didn't take it that way :Cheers I actually disagreed a fair amount with the stats technique the writer used. But I am interested to see what his final product for a revised "QB Rating" system will be.